Re: xemacs and xemacs-packages

At 0:18 Uhr +0900 12.12.2010, OBATA Akio wrote:
>1. xemacs is useful in these days?
For me, yes. YMMV, as always.
The pkgsrc versions are quite behind the curve, though. And the pkg
Makefiles are byzantine.
>2. xemacs-packags contains lot of modules for xemacs, and some of them are
> also provided by pkgsrc.
> 1) for xemacs, which is preferred, if both xemacs-packages and site-lisp
> are installed?
> 2) Do we need to maintain both for xemacs? for example, xemacs-packags
>contains
> SKK, but inputmethod/skk also must support xemacs?
...depends. I don't know if those pkgsrc'ed *emacs packages have been
properly tested with XEmacs. I remember when I used to set a bulk build to
build all those packages for XEmacs, most of them wouldn't build. That was
(at least) two years ago, but I suspect things haven't changed for the
better.
hauke
--
The ASCII Ribbon Campaign Hauke Fath
() No HTML/RTF in email Institut für Nachrichtentechnik
/\ No Word docs in email TU Darmstadt
Respect for open standards Ruf +49-6151-16-3281